Laura

The Wreck of HMS Speedy lays down a detailed picture of life in Upper Canada in the early 1800s. There are a lot of well-sourced facts and stories of people connected to the HMS Speedy disaster, but there are also a lot of creative liberties that seem to be taken to create more of a story for the reader. I didn't mind that but some people might.

After the wreck we fast-forward to recent history, of the efforts to find and uncover the mystery behind the wreck of the Speedy. I was a bit disappointed to find that not much really has been solved or discovered. It all bakes down to “we'll never truly know, but we're fairly confident”.

An insightful read, more about the life and times of people in York than information regarding the Speedy or its disaster. I was left feeling a bit underwhelmed after so much detailed backstory leading up to the actual Speedy voyage. I guess that's sort of how history works though.

Going to give this one a big YIKES. I'm sure this book was really groundbreaking in 1880, with the rudimentary explanation of alternate dimensions being before its time. That's the only merit I can give this book; it hasn't aged well.

There's no real story, let alone the so-called “Romance of Many Dimensions.” The promised humour was nowhere to be found and the scientific and mathematic logic was lacking, even for a layman of the 21st century. When I wasn't scratching my head at inconsistencies and broken logic, I was rolling my eyes at the misogyny, classism and racism (shapism?)

The author took barely any time explaining the mathematical or scientific rules of the world and instead focused solely on the society of Flatland. He went out of his way to tell readers that he wasn't about to explain how the world works; how they can walk or communicate, what they eat or how their language works. However the author found it important to spend chapters (yes, chapters) explaining that the women in Flatland are mindless, yet somehow overly emotional, beings that could accidentally kill you by walking into you at the wrong angle, and who must use separate doors and hum while they walk.

Promised to be a fun, humourous science fiction classic, got a 2-dimensional dystopian with heavy incel vibes. If you're interested in learning about spatial dimensions, find a 10 minute Youtube video on it and skip this tragedy.

It's incredibly surprising to me that this book is so highly acclaimed. Did we all read the same book?

RD Ronald's writing somehow spends a page of description without describing anything at all, uses bizarre metaphors/similes, and is packed with really cringe male gaze. The plot jumps around without context and the characters are completely devoid of.. well.. character.

It was a DNF for me.

Characters: ★★★★ Atmosphere: ★★★★★ Writing Style: ★★★★ Plot: ★★★ Intrigue: ★★★★★ Relationships: ★★★★ Enjoyment: ★★★★Rating: ★★★★½I kind of hate Soichi, but I also feel a lot of sympathy for Soichi.This collection of short stories features the misadventures everyone's least favourite preteen boy as he navigates social settings. Spoiler: he's creepy and weird and horrible to everyone. He's the little imp popping in from the ceiling to spit nails at you and gloomily say he never wanted to be invited anyway. That's where I feel an ounce of sympathy for our sweet, horrible boy. Although he earns everyone's disgust, it's hard not to see how he's affected by the alienation he's receiving in every social situation. He's a disturbed boy, seemingly cursed from birth to be a 'demon', but is he really THAT evil? Unlike a lot of other Ito series, there's no death in Soichi (from unnatural causes). There are a heck of a lot of hospitalizations, but everyone in the end is no worse for wear. He also doesn't ever really hurt his immediate family, and you kind of get the sense that his immediate family isn't scared of him at all. It makes me wonder just how reliable the narrators are in this story—is everything real or are these just terrified misrepresentations of a mischievous oddball boy who's got a strange fascination with the occult? In conclusion, I guess pretending to be a cat won't get you out of every situation, but you might as well try it anyway.

Structure: ★★★ Prose: ★★★★ Pacing: ★★★★★ Intrigue: ★★★★★ Logic: ★★★★★ Enjoyment: ★★★★★Rating: ★★★★½Prisoners of the Castle offers unique perspectives from WWII that can be heartwarming, heartbreaking and optimistic, all at the same time.When this was chosen as a book club pick I expected to read a harrowing tale filled with melancholy characters and horrific interactions. Instead, we see a sliver of hope and humanity in a faraway castle during one of the world's darkest times. We follow dozens of POWs, German soldiers and other notable characters in relation to Colditz throughout the length of the war and its aftermath. The reader gets to witness every escape attempt, visit every secret room or tunnel, and learn the outcome of dozens of soldiers who entered the castle. The structure of the story quickly jumped from one person's story to another, which was hard to follow sometimes, but followed a chronological timeline that helped recenter the reader along the way.In conclusion, I really want Wes Anderson to make a Colditz movie, but I fear the prisonbreak scene from Grand Budapest Hotel will be the best homage we get to the whimsy of the castle.

A great collection of anecdotes from Lynch, discussing his life, creativity, and TM. You're not really going to learn anything about how YOU can harness your creativity or how to meditate, you're just going to learn how Lynch does and his journey. It's a fun, light read if you love hearing Lynch talk (which I do).

Characters: ★★★★★ Atmosphere: ★★★★★ Writing Style: ★★★★ Plot: ★★★★ Intrigue: ★★★★ Relationships: ★★★★★ Enjoyment: ★★★★★Overall Rating: ★★★★½An exciting and heartwarming adventure that's both fun and easy to read.I listened to the audiobook version of this, which is the best way to experience this book for reasons the reader will soon discover. This was also the first books I've read of Weir's, so I can't personally compare this to his other works. We follow Ryland Grace's perspective, waking up in a space shuttle with no memory of why he's there, but through flashbacks he slowly recovers his memories and unveils the severity of his situation. Grace problem-solves his way through his mission, to some sort of resolution, but not without unexpected help. The book shines through its cast of characters and the humour that keeps things lighthearted. In conclusion, I hope that if I ever get stranded in space I find a sassy pal to help me through it.

Characters: ★★★★★ Atmosphere: ★★★★ Writing Style: ★★★★ Plot: ★★★★ Intrigue: ★★★★★ Relationships: ★★★★★ Enjoyment: ★★★★★Overall Rating: ★★★★½A tender and wholesome high school love story tackles the age old college dilemma.As Nick and Charlie's relationship develops, they run into a classic high school couple's problem: do they go to the best college or the closest college? I really love how the minor characters are really starting to form their own storylines and building deeper connections with the main characters. Heartstopper has been a refreshing queer love story that's wholesome and inclusive and I hope it never ends.In conclusion, if I Nick and Charlie make their relationship long distance I'm going to be so sad.

I will start off by saying I had really high expectations of this book based on the reviews and it being a Goodreads 2020 winner. It's engaging and easy to read, and I'm sure it could help some people get through rough times.

That being said, I found The Midnight Library to be a bit shallow and entirely predictable - like I was reading a mediocre YA book. I feel that the way depression is addressed in this book is immature and solved with empty platitudes. It's A Christmas Story with a modern woman twist, guided by a frustratingly apathetic librarian instead of ghosts.

Nora is down and out. Everything is going wrong, or at least she feels it is. Her spiral is the most gripping part of this book. When she eventually feels so in despair that she commits suicide, it kind of feels.. Like it comes from the plot needing to be driven rather than the character herself.

Once we get to the Midnight Library we start to go on our wild ride of different lives, something that you'd think should be super fun. Instead, every new life offers a view of the worst possible scenarios that Nora would be in if she did something she regretted not doing or vice versa. The author basically takes away any accountability in Nora's character by weaving a series of scenarios where her life is worse if she made different decisions:

Stayed with your ex-fiancé you walked out of your wedding on? He would have cheated on you and had a drinking problem anyway.

Didn't quit a promising swimming career? You would still be depressed, your dad would be a cheating scumbag and your mom would die alone.

Didn't back out last minute on an Australia trip with your best friend? She would die in a car crash on your birthday if you went.

Went out to coffee with that cute guy you turned down? Life is pretty good but your piano student's life goes down the wrong path and now he's a juvenile delinquent.

It feels like the book was made to show that no matter how good or bad your decision is, the life she lived is somehow the best of them all. It feels like there's a lack of self-reflection. Maybe Nora is kind of a shitty person for the things she's done to the people closest to her? No, that can't be. She shouldn't regret any decision she's made. Maybe she could take an ounce of accountability for where she is in her life? Well sure, but the only accountability you need to take is +staying positive+ when life temporarily sucks. There are a lot of people in situations where letting go of things and keeping your chin up isn't the cure to depression. This feels like the self-help 101 bandaid approach to the idea of mental illness.

Nora is also a self-proclaimed philosophy nerd, but I have never read a character lacking this amount of self-awareness or understanding of “the point”. She spends well over a year, maybe multiple years going through different lives and still doesn't spend a moment to think about all those philosophical perspectives of the mind and reality that the author tries to say she loves. After all her experiences she's still floundering in this alternate reality asking her guide what she's supposed to do. How can she quote philosophies and not take a minute to delve into literally any of the self-improving philosophies or ideas? It makes it feel like you're watching a teenager with limited understanding of philosophical concepts go through the motions rather than a highly educated 30-something year old.

The ending wraps up in a beautiful little bow that's sickeningly sweet. All of Nora's biggest regrets, all the things that were leaving her in despair are suddenly fixed. Her brother and her were on bad terms? Turns out a cry for help fixes everything. Best friend and you are drifting apart? Turns out she was just busy and she's moving back to your country next month! Your only piano student quit? No, he wants to continue lessons now! For all the unfixed things, well, didn't we learn they aren't her problem? Got fired from her job? Don't worry, it was a failing business anyway! Cat died? He would have died anyway! Ex-fiancé is still heartbroken? He was a fucking jerk, who cares!

It turns out that Nora was just suffering from situational depression, regardless of her history with anti-depressants. After the Midnight Library she has a new outlook on life. That's great for her, but the reader could have seen that coming within the first 80 pages. Once the first alternate life was so unsubtly wrong it was obvious that this was a self-help, don't-wallow-in-your-regrets type story. Sometimes it's okay to know the ending because the journey is enjoyable, but in this book it just felt like every different life somehow had the fun sucked out of it in order to spell out a moral or empty platitude. You knew she would inevitably be disappointed (whether it be by something so big as the death of a loved one or so small as boring sex) and she would learn that no life is perfect so just enjoy the one you have.

Overall, super preachy, lacking any subtlety, with a lead character whose main personality trait is that she doesn't have much of her own personality or identity at all.

If there exists a love letter to India, this would be the opposite. A Burning follows 3 characters whose lives are intertwined, dealing with the grittiest and worst aspects of Indian society.

There are extremely gripping and harrowing events in this book that leave you pitying the characters instead of rooting for them. All three characters aim to work their way up in social class, only to be battered down again and again by the system if they don't get extremely lucky or cheat it somehow.

I acclimated to the writing style, and the use of different tenses helped separate the voices of the 3 narrators. However, the writing style didn't lend itself well to the story or help me envision the characters better. It just ends up being a bit annoying to read, and limits the nuance of each character.

Overall, it was an entertaining (albeit horrifying) read that paints the Indian government and society in a single dark stroke.

I listened to a Librovox recording of this on Youtube without any context because it's on the “1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die” list. Little did I know, I'd be listening to an old man read a female POV smut book from the 18th century. I guess I assumed it would be more of a ‘Memoirs of a Geisha' type book.

Obviously there's little substance in the story other than women's vaginas (often described as slits) getting demolished by penises described as battering rams, wonderful machines, stiff staring truncheons, and engines of love-assaults. Super creative choices, to be sure.

The book is definitely on the list due to its cultural significance (as a banned book and first example of pornographic prose) rather than its allure or quality of writing.

I love Richard Ayoade and I grew up watching View from the Top, so I had pretty high expectations for this book. I should have known that I love Ayoade in short bursts, so reading his thoughts and being in his mind for more than a chapter was exhausting. I appreciate the concept of this book and would still recommend to his fans, but it was hard for me, personally, to get though.

I've already read this book twice over the past year, and I think it's going to be a resource I go back to year after year to feel inspired and rejuvenated. The writing is concise, witty, and just plain fun to read. It's a book directed towards new writers, but I think this can help all creative juniors and beyond.

Structure: ★★★★ Prose: ★ Pacing: ★★★ Intrigue: ★ Logic: ★ Enjoyment: ★Overall Rating: ★★A seemingly well-meaning self help piece that relies too heavily on misrepresenting research findings and leaning on philosophical theories.I'm a woman. I get burnt out. You'd think this would be the perfect book to find some enlightening information on how to cope. Instead, I found myself reading through more of the research the authors cited than the actual book itself, which in its own way burned me out!I don't disagree with a lot of the basic premises of this book. I agree with the Nagoskis' explanation of the stress cycle and how one might break out of it. I agree with the solutions they provide to help relieve stress and find support. I also agree with a lot of the feminist rhetoric they reference throughout the book (yes, the patriarchy [ugh] is real and yes, it can be a contributing factor to any person's stress.) Having said that, the information that I found to be relevant and factual wasn't all that groundbreaking and I'm sure anyone could find a TikTok or YouTube video that explains all the useful information in under 5 minutes. That's really unfortunate considering the shortcomings weighing against the work (in my opinion).Firstly, the prose was infuriating and borderline condescending. It felt very much as if this entire book was written for middle-grade students, not women, especially with the number of Disney references used to explain basic concepts. Ideas were over simplified and spoken in a tone that held 100% conviction in blatantly untrue statements (more on that later) while also somewhat talking down to the reader. The uses of (ugh) with any mention of ‘the patriarchy' and Nietzsche was insane to me. How can these women be hammering feminist philosophy into our heads the entire book yet they cringe every time they mention (and they mention it A LOT) one of feminism's most basic principles? They also provide TLDRs at the end of each chapter, which is an odd choice because it invites the reader to skip ¾'s of their book.My next big issue with the book is the ubiquitous thread of the Human Giver Syndrome (HGS) feminist philosophy used throughout the book to prove every point they make. It's one thing to mention HGS once or twice to drive a point across but I find it troubling that a philosophical theory is the essence of every chapter in this book and is written as absolute truth. Not only do I find it discrediting to use a single theory as the foundation of a mental health self help book, but the idea itself I find hard to support. The theory that all women (and all femmes and people of colour as per the footnote) are virtually born into giving every drop of their existence to checks notes all white men (and I guess all NBs and mascs too since they're not included in the previous footnote). This feels really icky and borderline sexist. I know some may relate to this idea and maybe it even helps some people realize a cycle they're in, but HGS just feels like an easy out; all women are victims to the system and white guys are benefitting off the patriarchy (ugh). The Nagoskis also flip flop between being a Human Giver as a good thing and a bad thing. Inherently, the suggestion is that no one should be a Human Giver because it strips your autonomy and self worth through giving “every drop of your humanity” to another (a man), yet it's also described as a great quality in women because we're therefore more conscientious and caring. When you describe something so visceral as giving your whole humanity to others, I don't know if you can backpaddle and spin it as a cute positive quirk that supposedly every femme and POC possesses. They even go so far as to suggest “[giving your] boys a lesson each day in being a human giver”. You want to teach your child to be codependent? That's not very healthy, and it's strange that we wouldn't just teach our daughters NOT to be human givers, no? I don't relate to HGS and it's definitely not a reason for my burnout, no matter how many times this book tries to affirm that it is. I've only identified with HGS in a past highly abusive and manipulative relationship, so I fear for the women who see this type of relationship to men as the norm.Lastly, but arguably most importantly, the authors misrepresent or straight up give inaccurate information from the sources they cite throughout the book. I read through a few dozen of the sources they cite to validate the accuracy of the information they provide throughout the book and was left very disappointed multiple times. Here are just some of the examples I wrote down:- They mention an article that apparently supports the ‘redistribution of sex' to support incels, yet the actual article (albeit written in a cringy right-wing tone) does suggest that sex should be a human right but is strongly against the idea of ‘redistribution of sex'. Instead the author suggests that decriminalizing sex work and promoting the innovation of sex robots (yeah) can help incels gain access to consensual sex. That's very different than the alarming characterization they made that a major newspaper supported forcing women into sex for incels.- They cite a study in Fiji where young girls watched American TV for the first time and stated that 29% of respondents showed signs of an ED within months. The study only interviewed 30 girls and the questions seemed to be leading the girls into answering that they were willing to diet to look like their favourite characters like Xena and Agent Dana Scully. While I'm sure there is validity to the argument that media changes how we see our bodies, a study of 30 girls in an interview study doesn't feel like a super credible source to hinge an important argument on. Also, 29% of 30 is 8.7 so I'm not sure how they got that percentage...- Later in the chapter they connect TWO sources to the statement, “only a very small fraction of the population can lose weight and sustain that weight loss through diet and exercise, establishing a new defended weight.” The first source is an “anti-obesity drug study” from the 1980's that's main goal was to prove that anti-obesity drugs work better than any other method of weight control after crash dieting. Okay, so not only is this study extremely problematic and antithetical to the Nagoskis' arguments, but they're using it to tell people that exercise and healthy eating won't help them reach any goals they might have? The first problem with this study is that all the participants crash dieted (an extremely unhealthy weight-loss method known to cause people to bounce back to their original weight shortly after), so that alone disregards ‘healthy diet and exercise'. Secondly, the study is aimed at discrediting any other method of weight management in order to promote their drug, however the healthy diet control group DID still see the benefits of a slower weight gain toward their original weight. The second study the Nagoskis cite actually contradicts their statement as well, with the study's conclusion reading, “Several studies using the Aerobic Center Longitudinal Study database have observed that cardiorespiratory fitness level and physical activity level are inversely associated with future weight gain,” meaning that people are less likely to go back to a defended weight as they exercise more. Neither study mentioned anything associated with or similar to a “defended weight”. So why are the Nagoskis telling readers that very few people can succeed in creating a new defended weight (if they want to!) when the studies they cite back to actually prove the opposite, even the problematic one they chose to use for some reason.- The last occurrence I'll mention (there are many more but I must move on with my life) is when the Nagoskis declare that men are more likely to use separate knowing and women are more likely to use connected knowing, and that is why women are Human Givers and men are not. What's really interesting is (drumroll please) that's actually just false! The study they cite for that statement actually says that men and women use both types of ‘knowing' equally, and that social context was more indicative of which gender used a specific type of knowing more. So really, men and women use different types of knowing based on which social groups they're with rather than intrinsically using one or the other more based on gender. I'm really trying not to believe that the authors acted in bad faith and assumed readers wouldn't look into the sources they provided, but the only other explanation for so many misrepresentations and twisting of facts is incompetence, and I just don't think that's much better.In conclusion, I ended up feeling more burnt out after reading this book than when I started. I constantly felt like I was being lied to in order to induce gender-based rage rather than actually addressing everyday reasons for burnout like the political and economic state of the world, international conflict, job instability, cost of living, loneliness, family and friend relationships, physical and mental health conditions, and so much more on top of the basic gender issues the authors single-mindedly hammered home. I was really close to giving this a 1-star but in the end they did give SOME useful and truthful information about breaking the stress cycle that I'm sure some people will find useful.

Insight into a cop's wet dream. Bang some babes at 7 o'clock, pursue a psycho murderer at 9.

The plot was enough to keep me interested, but the characters were all pretty underdeveloped to the point where I forgot which babe's house Lucas was at halfway through a chapter. The Maddog murderer started off strong but kind of felt too lucky and less cunning as the story went on. There was too much time spent on making Lucas look like a super cool, sexy, aloof badass, that the actual crime solving felt underwhelming.

The overall resolution felt too easy and unjustified for it to feel satisfying.

The Memory Police is a haunting dystopian story where the citizens of an island suffer en mass from items in their lives “disappearing” both from the world around them and their own memories. I loved the world, the tone, and the characters in the novel.

There were some inconsistencies in the book that I can only imagine were mistakes (disappeared items pop up in the story again as if they haven't disappeared) and loose ends that really diminished the level of storytelling for me.

The first half of the book is super compelling, then it just sort of trails off and doesn't explain enough to be satisfying or thought-provoking.